Godstud wrote:You misnaming the virus, to make it political, doesn't help your argument. It shows an inherent dishonesty and bias of your argument.
Just letting you know...
I’m using one of the names that the press came up with for the disease the CCP allowed out into the world, using the time-honored custom (among others) of naming it after its place of origin. Just because the WHO later came up with its own designation and the CCP’s “useful innocents” in the MSM(D) suddenly decided their previous actions were unconscionable is no reason to stop using it.
Hindsite wrote:The Wuhan Virus was what it was first called.
Godstud wrote:No. That's patently false.
January 22
Business Insider headline:
Here are the symptoms of the deadly Wuhan coronavirus and when you should be worriedJanuary 24
USA Today headline:
Something far deadlier than the Wuhan coronavirus lurks near you, right here in America (That “something far deadlier” was the flu, BTW—
that headline didn’t age well.)
January 25
Foreign Policy headline:
The Wuhan Virus: How to Stay Safe (they later changed the title in the article, but the original usage still shows in the article URL and in the name that shows up on the browser tab).
January 29
Bloomberg headline:
10-Year-Old Boy Raises Fears Wuhan Virus Could Spread UndetectedJanuary 30 NPR headline:
Your Questions About Wuhan Coronavirus, AnsweredCNN, February 18:
“A new Chinese coronavirus, a cousin of the SARS virus, has infected hundreds since the outbreak began in Wuhan, China, in December....
“It's not clear how deadly the Wuhan coronavirus (label used an additional seven times in the article) will be, but fatality rates are currently lower than both MERS and SARS. Experts stress that it will change as the outbreak develops.”
So yes, the MSM(D) was happy to use “Wuhan virus” when they weren’t using “Chinese virus” instead, before the CCP complained about it and they suddenly decided the usage was racist. Now what
does show an inherent bias and politicization is PoD’s continual use of “Trump virus.”
Pants-of-dog wrote:Your own sources say that the number of deaths from the Trump virus is being undercounted. And while some cases are temporarily marked as resulting from the Trump virus (even though the cause pf death was something else) those were removed later.
And even if you take out al the deaths like this, plus all the ones that are questionable, it still reduces the number insignificantly. 30 out of a thousand cases is nothing. That is less than statistical error.
Now, what does your spreadsheet look like when you use confirmed flu deaths instead?
Do you honestly think that the examples given are
all the times deaths have been falsely attributed to the Wuhan virus? I’m using the numbers provided by the CDC for average numbers of flu deaths, if you have a better source then provide the link.
Society cannot exist, unless a controlling power upon will and appetite be placed somewhere; and the less of it there is within, the more there must be without.
—Edmund Burke